On May 21, 2008, at 5:02 PM, Brian W. Barrett wrote:
> If this is true (for some reason I thought it wasn't), then I think
> actually be ok with your proposal, but you're right, you'd need
> new in the IB btl. I'm not concerned about the dual rail issue -- if
> you're smart enough to configure dual rail IB, you're smart enough to
> figure out OMPI mca params. I'm not sure the same is true for a
> delivered from the white box vendor IB setup that barely works on a
> day (and unfortunately, there seems to be evidence that these exist).
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying -- you agree, but what
"new" do you think we need in the openib BTL? The MCA params saying
which ports you expect to be ACTIVE?